Allowed

Poonam v. Yaseen Mohammad

Punjab & Haryana HC28 Sept 2022TA/16/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court transferred a matrimonial petition pending in the Family Court, Karnal, to the competent court at Kaithal. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court emphasized the female petitioner's convenience, distance, and expenses in deciding the transfer in an oral judgment.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; petition transferred from Karnal to Kaithal Family Court; record to be transferred; parties to appear in one month; case referred to mediation centre.

Poonam Vs Yaseen Mohammad — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2022)

¶1

TA No.16 of 2022 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

TA No.16 of 2022 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.09.2022

Poonam

....Petitioner

Versus

Yaseen Mohammad

....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

¶11

Present: Mr. Pawan Attri, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

None for the respondent.

¶13

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN J. (Oral)

¶14

Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed under Section 281 of the Mohammaden Law (Mulla) bearing No.DMC/3/2020, pending in the Family Court, Karnal to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Kaithal.

¶15

Counsel for the petitioner has argued that on account of a matrimonial discord, the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and also got registered an FIR at Kaithal.

¶16

Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the respondent/husband has filed the petition under Section 281 of the Mohammaden Law (Mulla) bearing No.DMC/3/2020, as a counterblast, before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Karnal.

¶17

Counsel for the petitioner has also argued that on account of a petition filed by the respondent/husband, the petitioner is facing great difficulty in prosecuting the said case as there is a distance of about 62 Kms from Kaithal to Karnal.

¶18

MOHD YAKUB 2022.09.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶19

TA No.16 of 2022 (O&M)

¶20

¶21

Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgments “Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay”, 2002 SC 396 and “Rajani Kishor Pardeshi vs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi”, 2005(12) SCC 237 , wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that while deciding the transfer application, the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships.”

¶22

Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the judgment “N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 Live Law (SC) 627 , wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed

¶23

as under:-

¶24

9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.

¶25

10. Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same

¶26

MOHD YAKUB 2022.09.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶27

TA No.16 of 2022 (O&M)

¶28

¶29

Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.”

¶30

It is well settled that while considering the transfer of a

¶31

matrimonial dispute/case at the instance of the wife, the Court is to consider the family condition of the wife, the custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and most important the convenience of the wife i.e. she cannot travel alone without assistance of a male member of her family, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses.

¶32

As per the office report, the respondent has been served, however, there is no representation on his behalf.

¶33

After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, considering the fact that the petitioner/wife will have to bear the litigation expenses and transportation expenses and in view of the judgments i.e. Sumita Singh’s case (supra) , Rajani Kishor Pardeshi’s case (supra) and N.C.V. Aishwarya’s case (supra) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court deem it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions:-

¶34

1. The petition filed under Section 281 of the Mohammaden Law (Mulla) bearing No.DMC/3/2020, pending before the Family Court, Karnal will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Kaithal.

¶35

2. The District Judge, Kaithal, will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.

¶36

3. The Family Court, Karnal is directed to transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Kaithal.

¶37

MOHD YAKUB 2022.09.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶38

TA No.16 of 2022 (O&M)

¶39

¶40

4. The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court, Kaithal, within a period of 01 month from today.

¶41

5. The Family Court, Kaithal will make all endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement between the parties.

¶42

6. The Court concerned, where the litigation pending between the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar month.

¶43

Disposed of.

¶44

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN)

¶45

JUDGE

¶46

28.09.2022 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶47

MOHD YAKUB 2022.09.28 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Poonam v. Yaseen Mohammad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Poonam v. Yaseen Mohammad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyoti Saini Vs Rajan

Kamaldeep Kaur Vs Janakdeep Singh

Amit Kumar Singla Vs Haryana Urban Development Authority (Huda) and Ors.

Sonia Vs Yamin Mohammad

Sukhpreet Kaur Vs Sarabjit Singh

Pinki Vs Rajesh Gupta